Management Threads | Structure. Standards. Habits.

[drax0s]

I don't know why exactly, but I think they'll make the playoffs next season. This can be used later as a receipt by me to gloat, or by others to rub in my face, fun for everyone!

Really depends on Demko. If he's like last year, no chance.

 

[arttk]

Just tell me one thing and you can PM me if you dont want to post it.

Do you ACTUALLY believe this is how the world works or are you just taking the position because it serves your argument of everything-management-does-is-fine?

You keep ignoring that, a heads up a not always appreciated if there is nothing you can do. If you tell someone oh you are going to lose 1/3 of your future earnings, the natural response is, wtf can I do that make sure I don’t lose it. In OEL’s case, there is nothing they can do, but then knowing early will just make OEL and his agent scramble to try to find a trade partner because who wants to lose out on 12M guaranteed money. Then they will spend however many days stressing over that only to have no resolution because there is no bloody way anyone will pay for OEL and no bloody way Vancouver will package picks and retain. Do you not understand how shitty that is? Just tell him he’s going to be bought out and then do it right away is the most respectful way to do it. There is no time for the agent and OEL to stress over it and they will be forced to move on.

Think about it, if somebody told you tomorrow you will lose 12/32 million in let’s say a week. You sure as hell will be stressing out about how not to lose that 12M for that whole duration.

 

[RandV]

Another weird hill to die on. From what I recall seeing OEL was surprised that he was bought out. If he was told before hand then the only thing that changes is that he's surprised he's going to be bought out. Really the only way to not incur whatever is being argued here is to... not buy him out. Which then defeats the purpose of the whole thing.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

You keep ignoring that, a heads up a not always appreciated if there is nothing you can do. If you tell someone oh you are going to lose 1/3 of your future earnings, the natural response is, wtf can I do that make sure I don’t lose it. In OEL’s case, there is nothing they can do, but then knowing early will just make OEL and his agent scramble to try to find a trade partner because who wants to lose out on 12M guaranteed money. Then they will spend however many days stressing over that only to have no resolution because there is no bloody way anyone will pay for OEL and no bloody way Vancouver will package picks and retain. Do you not understand how shitty that is? Just tell him he’s going to be bought out and then do it right away is the most respectful way to do it. There is no time for the agent and OEL to stress over it and they will be forced to move on.

Think about it, if somebody told you tomorrow you will lose 12/32 million in let’s say a week. You sure as hell will be stressing out about how not to lose that 12M for that whole duration.

That is not my point.

That is a purely utilitarian view.

"How does it benefit OEL financially."


Please use your head and think about the other factors involved for f***s sake.

Its insane that you think its the same for a random IT worker...

Another weird hill to die on. From what I recall seeing OEL was surprised that he was bought out. If he was told before hand then the only thing that changes is that he's surprised he's going to be bought out. Really the only way to not incur whatever is being argued here is to... not buy him out. Which then defeats the purpose of the whole thing.

Its the difference between texting someone you are breaking up with them and actually doing it in person.

Im starting to think this is yet another cultural difference between Europe and North America. Since to me its obvious and to you guys its a completely mysterious idea.

Kinda found the same with Doerrie.

 

[racerjoe]

That is not my point.

That is a purely utilitarian view.

"How does it benefit OEL financially."


Please use your head and think about the other factors involved for f***s sake.

Its insane that you think its the same for a random IT worker...


Its the difference between texting someone you are breaking up with them and actually doing it in person.

Im starting to think this is yet another cultural difference between Europe and North America. Since to me its obvious and to you guys its a completely mysterious idea.

Kinda found the same with Doerrie.

Yes our Swedish GM is too American...

 

[me2]

I wish OEL gave the Canucks the polite courtesy of telling them he sucks worse than most people thought he did. Pretty unclassy of him to just spring that on everyone.

He gave 2 years notice. Jimbo signed him anyway.

 

[arttk]

That is not my point.

That is a purely utilitarian view.

"How does it benefit OEL financially."


Please use your head and think about the other factors involved for f***s sake.

Its insane that you think its the same for a random IT worker...


Its the difference between texting someone you are breaking up with them and actually doing it in person.

Im starting to think this is yet another cultural difference between Europe and North America. Since to me its obvious and to you guys its a completely mysterious idea.

Kinda found the same with Doerrie.

This is the most naive take possible. When you have money and livelihood involved, your action needs to have more purpose than just doing it because of courtesy.
Are you honestly that naive? Of course you need to be more utilitarian when you are giving news to somebody that he’s going to lose 12M dollar. Last thing you want is to give that advance notice only to have the agent and player go overdrive to multiple teams to negotiate only to end up being stonewalled by the Nucks and have everyone feel like absolute shit after.

Your example is like trying to have a breakup where you want to be the nice guy but ends up giving false hope that there might be a chance when there isn’t and shit just gets nasty. Yeah you are that kinda guy who is concerned about how other will see you rather than doing the right thing and cutting things off clean.

You siding with Doerrie despite the “evidence” she has provided saids more about you than anything lol.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

This is the most naive take possible. When you have money and livelihood involved, your action needs to have more purpose than just doing it because of courtesy.
Are you honestly that naive? Of course you need to be more utilitarian when you are giving news to somebody that he’s going to lose 12M dollar. Last thing you want is to give that advance notice only to have the agent and player go overdrive to multiple teams to negotiate only to end up being stonewalled by the Nucks and have everyone feel like absolute shit after.

Nothing naive about it at all.

Your example is like trying to have a breakup where you want to be the nice guy but ends up giving false hope that there might be a chance when there isn’t and shit just gets nasty. Yeah you are that kinda guy who is concerned about how other will see you rather than doing the right thing and cutting things off clean.

What the actual f***? How does your mind come up with this shit?

You siding with Doerrie despite the “evidence” she has provided saids more about you than anything lol.

Your mind works in such a peculiar way.

It is called MANAGING. They managed Doerries situation is such a way that it got public.

You invent these premises and then get stuck on them and argue as if those premises you invented are facts never able to move on from them.

You must consistently get in to arguments with everyone in your everyday life with how illogical your way if seeing the world is.

 

[arttk]

Nothing naive about it at all.

What the actual f***? How does your mind come up with this shit?


Your mind works in such a peculiar way.

It is called MANAGING. They managed Doerries situation is such a way that it got public.

You invent these premises and then get stuck on them and argue as if those premises you invented are facts never able to move on from them.

You must consistently get in to arguments with everyone in your everyday life with how illogical your way if seeing the world is.

I am not inventing any premise, it’s just that you haven’t thought through how people will react to news that impacts their livelihood. The fact you think it’s more important to try to give warm fuzzy feelings when you are making a business decision that results in the other party losing out on millions of dollars shows how naive you are about things.

Doerrie is an example of a disgruntled employee pointing fingers at everyone else instead of looking at what she did herself.
Anybody working in a normal job can tell you if you violate company policy and on top of that complain to HR about your boss who is an executive with bogus claims you are going to get fired.

at the end of the day, if she wanted a good payout she could have gone to the labor board and file for unjust termination or something but nope she had to file a human rights complaint with bogus reasons like her being discriminated because of her sex and disability.

It’s telling how that is the story you want to side with. Really shows naive you are when it comes to corporate world.

 

[andora]

That is not my point.

That is a purely utilitarian view.

"How does it benefit OEL financially."


Please use your head and think about the other factors involved for f***s sake.

Its insane that you think its the same for a random IT worker...


Its the difference between texting someone you are breaking up with them and actually doing it in person.

Im starting to think this is yet another cultural difference between Europe and North America. Since to me its obvious and to you guys its a completely mysterious idea.

Kinda found the same with Doerrie.

I have found it to be both.. with common folk a manager could give a heads up so the person can have time to adjust and look for something else

On the flip side it can be done early for the same reasons so the person has an option to take the last bit of time in pay and leave.. still havimg time to look elsewhere

On the flip flip side there could be concern about the person sabotaging and not told early

But again depends on the manager and environment

 

[DFAC]

Here’s what I think has to happen this offseason for it to be a success:

- Keep pick 11 unless someone gives you a cost controlled, quality young player for it. This team needs a few cost controlled players to build off any success they have this season and next, and pick 11 is by far their best shot at having that. They can’t move it unless replaced with something with similar upside.

- Dump a winger to make more cap space. Ideally Boeser, Beauvillier or Garland in that order. They need more space to upgrade core positions.

- Move any assets outside of Pettersson/Kuzmenko/Hughes/Hronek/11 for the best young defender moved this summer with a reasonable amount of control. Don’t get outbid unless someone else gives up a premium asset you can’t match.

- Pick up one more top-4 quality defender that plays on the opposite side of the other new acquisition. If they take a defender with pick 11, they should probably focus on a potential cap dump who can still play, like Grzelak. If not, then some term for someone like Soucy is fine.

- Find a good under the radar signing for 3C without blowing the bank. Basically someone that provides surplus value without hamstringing the team in a couple of season due to the size of contract.

With that, I think they make enough progress to justify the path they’re on. Bonus points for:

- Ditch the Miller contract before it kicks in and separately add a 2C to replace him. Will likely have to give up some PP utility in doing so but should be able to replace his EV value.

- Dump Myers without paying a ton.

Agree with most of this but I think we hold onto Myers and Beauvillier until the TDL where they have the most value as rentals. Hopefully we can get some mid round picks back for them then

 

[PuckMunchkin]

I am not inventing any premise, it’s just that you haven’t thought through how people will react to news that impacts their livelihood. The fact you think it’s more important to try to give warm fuzzy feelings when you are making a business decision that results in the other party losing out on millions of dollars shows how naive you are about things.

Its called pr.

Doerrie is an example of a disgruntled employee pointing fingers at everyone else instead of looking at what she did herself.
Anybody working in a normal job can tell you if you violate company policy and on top of that complain to HR about your boss who is an executive with bogus claims you are going to get fired.

Its called managing a disgruntled employee.

at the end of the day, if she wanted a good payout she could have gone to the labor board and file for unjust termination or something but nope she had to file a human rights complaint with bogus reasons like her being discriminated because of her sex and disability.

It’s telling how that is the story you want to side with. Really shows naive you are when it comes to corporate world.

Nothing naive. Just another thing in life where you lack understanding.

 

[Hoglander]

As someone that has ran businesses and had to fire numerous people, I can say that you do it when it suits your needs, not theirs. You dont give people a heads up, and in this case OEL was drastically underperforming and due a massive payday buyout- he isn't the victim here. Like what, they maybe could have told him a few days earlier? Cry me a river. What would that actually change? Nothing.

When it's time to let someone go, you just get it done. No coddling, no sugarcoating. Think Billy Beane in moneyball.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

As someone that has ran businesses and had to fire numerous people, I can say that you do it when it suits your needs, not theirs. You dont give people a heads up, and in this case OEL was drastically underperforming and due a massive payday buyout- he isn't the victim here. Like what, they maybe could have told him a few days earlier? Cry me a river. What would that actually change? Nothing.

When it's time to let someone go, you just get it done. No coddling, no sugarcoating. Think Billy Beane in moneyball.

And that is fine for your tiny business with zero public presence.

Pretending your small business is the same as a NHL team is Pejorative Slured.

 

[MarkMM]

Its called pr.



Its called managing a disgruntled employee.

Nothing naive. Just another thing in life where you lack understanding.

On the OEL thing, yeah, we might be missing a lot of context so it's hard to say. Allvin, Tocchet, everyone was publicly saying that the plan was to bring him back, and so maybe that was honestly the plan. And JR and PA have also been saying that the plan was to find other ways to move cap, and they've been saying it for two seasons now.

Something I can see plausibly happening is that they planned to clear up room through a trade or two, and maybe had some discussions in the works that gave them confidence that something would happen eventually, but then maybe it all fell through and they went to FAQ and told him straight up that they've done everything they can and if they want to get on with it (notice no signiings of Bear, Juulsen, Bourroughs, etc was happening, not to mention we probably want to be in long-term discussions with Pettersson), then they needed to buy out OEL and FAQ finally said "okay". At that point, yeah, you call OEL and his agent and he'd be "surprised" but you go ahead with it anyway. No foul play by management, OEL being shocked or not isn't something that we should be managing our team around.

As for Doerrie, I really like her analysis and think she's well placed as a commentator, but it presumes A LOT to automatically default to this must be the Canucks fault because this went public. Managing a disgruntled employee only goes so far, at some point if someone is unreasonable there's only so much can be done. All we know right now is she said / she said between Doerrie and Castonguay, Castonguay has as far as one can tell an unblemished track record of everyone who's worked with her saying great things. Doerrie on the other hand tends to get fired pretty quickly whenever she's been hired by an NHL team. Is that conclusive? No. But on balance of probabilities, what's more likely the case, Doerrie who has a spotty track record in multiple jobs suddenly being the only person who's right and is the innocent victim while everyone else is wrong in protecting Castonguay who suddenly after having nothing but a spotless record is suddenly this maniacal abusive person, even though bizarrely only to Doerrie as no one else is coming forward with similar accusations?

I'm not wild about a lot of management's decisions but the OEL and Doerrie items are two things that it's a stretch to say have been poorly managed. They both fall into the category of some things don't work out, bite the bullet and get on with it as best you can, and not much more they can or should have done that would have been productive from the data we have.

 

[Hoglander]

And that is fine for your tiny business with zero public presence.

Pretending your small business is the same as a NHL team is Pejorative Slured.

Not sure why you hate the Canucks so much but it's a pretty tired schtick, to be honest.

It's pretty clear how things went down: they didn't plan to buy him out unless they had to. They were in talks with other teams about other options. Obviously (like, painfully obvious), they were not going to go public with an OEL buyout, when there was still hope that something else could be done, in which they could avoid the buyout. Telling OEL he will be bought out, when they didn't even know yet themselves, is nonsensical. What don't you understand about this? They didn't decide this weeks ago.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

On the OEL thing, yeah, we might be missing a lot of context so it's hard to say. Allvin, Tocchet, everyone was publicly saying that the plan was to bring him back, and so maybe that was honestly the plan. And JR and PA have also been saying that the plan was to find other ways to move cap, and they've been saying it for two seasons now.

Something I can see plausibly happening is that they planned to clear up room through a trade or two, and maybe had some discussions in the works that gave them confidence that something would happen eventually, but then maybe it all fell through and they went to FAQ and told him straight up that they've done everything they can and if they want to get on with it (notice no signiings of Bear, Juulsen, Bourroughs, etc was happening, not to mention we probably want to be in long-term discussions with Pettersson), then they needed to buy out OEL and FAQ finally said "okay". At that point, yeah, you call OEL and his agent and he'd be "surprised" but you go ahead with it anyway. No foul play by management, OEL being shocked or not isn't something that we should be managing our team around.

Im going to have to apologize if this is actually how it went down.

I thought no personal phone call took place at all and they heard about the buyout from the league as it was processed.

As for Doerrie, I really like her analysis and think she's well placed as a commentator, but it presumes A LOT to automatically default to this must be the Canucks fault because this went public. Managing a disgruntled employee only goes so far, at some point if someone is unreasonable there's only so much can be done. All we know right now is she said / she said between Doerrie and Castonguay, Castonguay has as far as one can tell an unblemished track record of everyone who's worked with her saying great things. Doerrie on the other hand tends to get fired pretty quickly whenever she's been hired by an NHL team. Is that conclusive? No. But on balance of probabilities, what's more likely the case, Doerrie who has a spotty track record in multiple jobs suddenly being the only person who's right and is the innocent victim while everyone else is wrong in protecting Castonguay who suddenly after having nothing but a spotless record is suddenly this maniacal abusive person, even though bizarrely only to Doerrie as no one else is coming forward with similar accusations?

I think these are two completely separate issues.

One is who is the guilty party the second is how it was handled and subsequently became a PR nightmare.

I'm not wild about a lot of management's decisions but the OEL and Doerrie items are two things that it's a stretch to say have been poorly managed. They both fall into the category of some things don't work out, bite the bullet and get on with it as best you can, and not much more they can or should have done that would have been productive from the data we have.

The buyout it self makes perfect sense with where the management (falsely) thinks the team is at. So its logical.

If they did indeed call OEL and he didn't hear about this from the league then I am completely fine with how they handled it.

Not sure why you hate the Canucks so much but it's a pretty tired schtick, to be honest.

It's pretty clear how things went down: they didn't plan to buy him out unless they had to. They were in talks with other teams about other options. Obviously (like, painfully obvious), they were not going to go public with an OEL buyout, when there was still hope that something else could be done, in which they could avoid the buyout. Telling OEL he will be bought out, when they didn't even know yet themselves, is nonsensical. What don't you understand about this? They didn't decide this weeks ago.

I thought they did not personally inform OEL and his Agent.

I was wrong.

This conversation makes a ton more sense to me now.

 

[arttk]

Its called pr.



Its called managing a disgruntled employee.

Nothing naive. Just another thing in life where you lack understanding.

You tell him early and him and his agent will reach out to teams to see if they can arrange a trade. That will get leaked out to the media and then you have a cycle of OEL buyout rumors.

If anything, doing it so early and so fast was a good thing since OEL and agent has time to prep for UFA. Hell Friedman called it the best thing for all parties involved in the 32 pod yesterday. Lol bad PR.

She got chewed out by Castonguy and in response to that she filed a sexism and disability discrimination? If an employee goes to the point of making up bogus claims to the human rights court, there is no managing of that. This is simply a case of an unmanageable employee that has zero discipline, low threshold for feedback. If anything, shit like this sucks because human right and disability right activist didn’t fight so hard for these rights so that people will come to file frivolous lawsuits and set the movement backwards.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

You tell him early and him and his agent will reach out to teams to see if they can arrange a trade. That will get leaked out to the media and then you have a cycle of OEL buyout rumors.

If anything, doing it so early and so fast was a good thing since OEL and agent has time to prep for UFA. Hell Friedman called it the best thing for all parties involved in the 32 pod yesterday. Lol bad PR.

Yeah I was wrong.

I thought they did not personally contact OEL and his agent.

She got chewed out by Castonguy and in response to that she filed a sexism and disability discrimination? If an employee goes to the point of making up bogus claims to the human rights court, there is no managing of that. This is simply a case of an unmanageable employee that has zero discipline, low threshold for feedback. If anything, shit like this sucks because human right and disability right activist didn’t fight so hard for these rights so that people will come to file frivolous lawsuits and set the movement backwards.

Another piece of your fan fiction.

This will actually be the last piece of @arttk fanfic I ever read. Godspeed.

 

[bossram]

You know that you pretty much outline a rebuild.

When your retool hinges purely on getting picks and said picks not busting. The probability of it becoming a rebuild is more than quite likely.

Let’s ignore the fact that the odds of those picks busting is above 50%. Even if all the picks hit magically, they are 3 years away from hitting the NHL and unless they are like super rookies, you won’t get meaningful contribution until 4 or 5 years away. Meanwhile, the act of trading away your most important players and cap for picks, you have created a team that is quite poor and will very likely tank hard. But wait! There is cap and we can get players right? But the FA market is shit and doesn’t offer anyone that can remotely fill those holes. How about trades? Wait you just said we should not trade any picks so how are we getting players?

It all goes back to, yeah you just want to rebuild. Even your non rebuild ideas will lead to an accidental rebuild.

I mean, if you want to be willingly obtuse, sure, it's all a rebuild. Especially the noted the rebuild move I suggested of pursuing Marino. Total rebuild, of course.

Again, you continually argue things I've never said. It's a sign that you don't know what you're talking about.

 

[bossram]

I may not be understanding what you are saying here, so if I have what you mean wrong, I am sorry, my bad.

But your non rebuild idea is to trade Miller and Horvat for picks? Isn't that still a rebuild?

Marino has been talked about to death and the team really just didn't have the assets to make that trade. Rathbone is not viewed as an equal or even close to asset, and our pick wasn't as good. I wanted Marino last off season, I just didn't think he would go for what he ended up going for.

No. It's not a rebuild. It's moving the age curve back. Perhaps if they liquidated Miller earlier, they would have had the assets to acquire Marino too. You swap out a 30 year old for a 25 year old, on net. You have some more assets to pounce on similar opportunities. Collect more assets by taking on a cap dump player. Take the next two seasons to cycle through bargain bin opportunities that might be big hits (i.e. try to find something like the next Carter Verhaeghe).

Set yourself up to compete in 2024-25, when Allvin himself admitted he thought the club would be taking off. Stop sacrificing for immediate the short-term.

 

[mriswith]

A rebuild is when you need to replace the entire core. Drafting your new 1C, 1D, 1G kind of thing.

Selling UFA aged players and eating one or two development years when your team is set up to be bad no matter what because of bad contract and farm situations from a previous idiot GM is an entirely different thing.

 

[arttk]

Yeah I was wrong.

I thought they did not personally contact OEL and his agent.

Another piece of your fan fiction.

This will actually be the last piece of @arttk fanfic I ever read. Godspeed.

Lol fan fiction. She went on a media tour and basically presented her case in the most public way possible.

Once she finished her tour and released her case details, then collective response was, wait is this it? Even in her own remarks, everyone from the Nucks were great and she had one peoblem, Castonguy. Considering that you have an axe to grind and probably didn’t bother to read up on it, ahem OEL, you can listen/ watch her making her case on your tube or in podcast form.

 

[racerjoe]

No. It's not a rebuild. It's moving the age curve back. Perhaps if they liquidated Miller earlier, they would have had the assets to acquire Marino too. You swap out a 30 year old for a 25 year old, on net. You have some more assets to pounce on similar opportunities. Collect more assets by taking on a cap dump player. Take the next two seasons to cycle through bargain bin opportunities that might be big hits (i.e. try to find something like the next Carter Verhaeghe).

Set yourself up to compete in 2024-25, when Allvin himself admitted he thought the club would be taking off. Stop sacrificing for immediate the short-term.

Isn't this pretty much we are doing though with the exception of signing Miller? The oldest player we have acquired is 27, flipped Horvat for a 25 year old?

A rebuild is when you need to replace the entire core. Drafting your new 1C, 1D, 1G kind of thing.

Selling UFA aged players and eating one or two development years when your team is set up to be bad no matter what because of bad contract and farm situations from a previous idiot GM is an entirely different thing.

If you remove too many of your now pieces you will be forced to draft a new 1C, 1D and 1G.

 

[mriswith]

If you remove too many of your now pieces you will be forced to draft a new 1C, 1D and 1G.

Nothing catastrophic is going to happen from 1-2 developmental seasons as long as there is an upward trend resulting from it.

We were going to be bad this season and last anyways, it would have been better to profit from it and be better set up for the future. Instead we were bad anyways, but didn't benefit from it at all.